GokartMozart315 wrote:i find it strange that so many people suggest sitting out a law school cycle and retaking. most people aren't just going to put off their next career move for another year; if you're applying to law school that's likely your life plan, and you clearly aren't pleased with the status quo. delaying for a year is a very extreme move; i think for most people, myself included, you're going to go with the best option among the schools you have, and that's all there is to say about it

This is a very short-sighted viewpoint, and one that is very dangerous. I am a K-JD student and I was fortunate to get a good job, but in hindsight I should have retaken and reapplied. I left points on the table in my retake, which means I left tens of thousands of dollars on the table for a retake. Even if I had just retaken and still wound up at the same school, I could have gotten a full ride.

Here's three reasons why time off is good:

1) We're talking about a career here, and to potentially sacrifice millions of dollars of future earnings and go into hundreds of thousands of debt just to avoid taking a year off is financially reckless. For example, if OP were to retake the LSAT again and get 4-5 more points, he could go to a MUCH better law school and have a far better shot at a six-figure job. The career earnings for a median graduate of the T14 who goes to a biglaw firm could easily be millions of dollars greater than someone who graduates median at a T2/3 school. That's not elitism or anything, that's a fact. In the short term, taking a year off and retaking can and does net people tens of thousands of dollars more in scholarship money. This isn't really relevant to this particular OP's position, but it is relevant to a lot of people. The benefit in delaying can be extremely great, while the harm in delaying a year is minimal (in fact, it may actually be helpful... see below).

3) From a personal maturity standpoint, taking a year off is usually the way to go. I've never met anyone who thought their time off hurt them, but there are plenty of people who wish they had done so. Even though going straight through was a good move for me, I realize I probably made the wrong call going straight through when I matriculated two years ago.

GokartMozart315 wrote:i find it strange that so many people suggest sitting out a law school cycle and retaking. most people aren't just going to put off their next career move for another year; if you're applying to law school that's likely your life plan, and you clearly aren't pleased with the status quo. delaying for a year is a very extreme move; i think for most people, myself included, you're going to go with the best option among the schools you have, and that's all there is to say about it

This is a very short-sighted viewpoint, and one that is very dangerous. I am a K-JD student and I was fortunate to get a good job, but in hindsight I should have retaken and reapplied. I left points on the table in my retake, which means I left tens of thousands of dollars on the table for a retake. Even if I had just retaken and still wound up at the same school, I could have gotten a full ride.

Here's three reasons why time off is good:

1) We're talking about a career here, and to potentially sacrifice millions of dollars of future earnings and go into hundreds of thousands of debt just to avoid taking a year off is financially reckless. For example, if OP were to retake the LSAT again and get 4-5 more points, he could go to a MUCH better law school and have a far better shot at a six-figure job. The career earnings for a median graduate of the T14 who goes to a biglaw firm could easily be millions of dollars greater than someone who graduates median at a T2/3 school. That's not elitism or anything, that's a fact. In the short term, taking a year off and retaking can and does net people tens of thousands of dollars more in scholarship money. This isn't really relevant to this particular OP's position, but it is relevant to a lot of people. The benefit in delaying can be extremely great, while the harm in delaying a year is minimal (in fact, it may actually be helpful... see below).

3) From a personal maturity standpoint, taking a year off is usually the way to go. I've never met anyone who thought their time off hurt them, but there are plenty of people who wish they had done so. Even though going straight through was a good move for me, I realize I probably made the wrong call going straight through when I matriculated two years ago.

i agree with your point, though looking at it from a diff situation. two years out of school, i've maxed out the potential i'm going to get on the current career track without a law degree, am not going to study for the lsat again (don't see why people think you're guaranteed to do better again, you're not), and don't want to be a middle-aged first-year associate. you can realistically only delay law school so long before it doesn't make as much sense

3) From a personal maturity standpoint, taking a year off is usually the way to go. I've never met anyone who thought their time off hurt them, but there are plenty of people who wish they had done so. Even though going straight through was a good move for me, I realize I probably made the wrong call going straight through when I matriculated two years ago.

This.

Additionally, it might help you narrow your focus down to the point that you actually have an idea of what you want post-graduation (assuming you work in the legal field you're interested in going into). I can't tell you the number of blank stares I received at ASD's last month when I asked other prospectives to clarify what they meant by "public interest law." I stopped saying "like what?" after the 50th person told me they plan on going into public interest law. It seems like that's all they know how to say and I wonder if they even know what it means.

GokartMozart315 wrote:i agree with your point, though looking at it from a diff situation. two years out of school, i've maxed out the potential i'm going to get on the current career track without a law degree, am not going to study for the lsat again (don't see why people think you're guaranteed to do better again, you're not), and don't want to be a middle-aged first-year associate. you can realistically only delay law school so long before it doesn't make as much sense

Whoops, didn't see this. I'd be careful knocking the number of years you've been out just because of the number itself. If you feel like this is the next logical choice in your career, fine, but if it's because you feel like "life is passing you by," then I'd say that's not a good reason to go to law school. I graduated college in 2006 and I'm starting law school this fall because I want to and I know exactly where I want to go afterward. In the interim I: 1) went into the AmeriCorps after college, which was an incredibly rewarding experience and also threw me down the path that I'm currently on; 2) have been working in the field for years, which has given me a lot of insight into how the system works and what I'm actually interested in plus TONS of contacts you can be sure I'll be using both in and out of law school; 3) met my fiancee, which has certainly given me perspective on what's actually important in life; 4) ran the NYC marathon, which was probably one of the most amazing experiences of my life and has created an awesome stress outlet.

Long story short, me at 27 is an incredibly far cry from me at 21 when I was preparing to go into law school. Even with the wrecked economy and job market, I'm much happier with the way I'm doing it now than I would've been had I just blundered ahead while I was in college. My age and work experience have been a distinct advantage for me as well in both admissions and scholarship offers. I also feel like I've put waaaaaay more thought into it than I would have when I was 21.

GokartMozart315 wrote:i agree with your point, though looking at it from a diff situation. two years out of school, i've maxed out the potential i'm going to get on the current career track without a law degree, am not going to study for the lsat again (don't see why people think you're guaranteed to do better again, you're not), and don't want to be a middle-aged first-year associate. you can realistically only delay law school so long before it doesn't make as much sense

Whoops, didn't see this. I'd be careful knocking the number of years you've been out just because of the number itself. If you feel like this is the next logical choice in your career, fine, but if it's because you feel like "life is passing you by," then I'd say that's not a good reason to go to law school. I graduated college in 2006 and I'm starting law school this fall because I want to and I know exactly where I want to go afterward. In the interim I: 1) went into the AmeriCorps after college, which was an incredibly rewarding experience and also threw me down the path that I'm currently on; 2) have been working in the field for years, which has given me a lot of insight into how the system works and what I'm actually interested in plus TONS of contacts you can be sure I'll be using both in and out of law school; 3) met my fiancee, which has certainly given me perspective on what's actually important in life; 4) ran the NYC marathon, which was probably one of the most amazing experiences of my life and has created an awesome stress outlet.

Long story short, me at 27 is an incredibly far cry from me at 21 when I was preparing to go into law school. Even with the wrecked economy and job market, I'm much happier with the way I'm doing it now than I would've been had I just blundered ahead while I was in college. My age and work experience have been a distinct advantage for me as well in both admissions and scholarship offers. I also feel like I've put waaaaaay more thought into it than I would have when I was 21.

thanks for sharing your story. what you say makes a lot of sense, though i'm absolutely sure law school is the next logical step for me; i just also think the life issue is a factor, and i take it pretty seriously, a personal thing i suppose

I am a UConn student lucky enough to have a position with a good firm this summer, and I think you should wait a year and reapply. Between Cardozo and UConn, I think it comes down to where you want to work. If you have to take out loans for living expenses at UConn but would have no debt at all from Cardozo, then this gives a definite edge to Cardozo.

I think that you have a better than 20% chance of getting a decent job from UConn, at least if you define decent as one where you learn to practice a substantive area of law and can afford a middle class lifestyle or better. Around 70% of the class gets this. If you define "decent" as biglaw or midlaw, then yeah, the number of people with those jobs shrinks to around 20%. If you want to work at a big firm in NY, you need to be one of the top students here.

I have not seen any evidence of section stacking at UConn, but I cannot be completely certain it does not occur.

If you get into a better school next year, you would have a much better shot at earning 100k+ right out of the gate. However, you might be paying sticker at Cornell (just an example), so although the risk of getting screwed goes down (more of Cornell's class gets good jobs), the consequences of not getting a legal job go up (no job and huge debt). Overall, I imagine you could get into a better school with a good scholly if you reapplied, especially if you managed to get your LSAT up a bit. You are right that it does not go up for everyone who retakes, but even if your score doesn't improve, your list of acceptances will if you apply early next year.

GokartMozart315 wrote:i find it strange that so many people suggest sitting out a law school cycle and retaking. most people aren't just going to put off their next career move for another year; if you're applying to law school that's likely your life plan, and you clearly aren't pleased with the status quo. delaying for a year is a very extreme move; i think for most people, myself included, you're going to go with the best option among the schools you have, and that's all there is to say about it

There's something to this. TLS can sometimes take the "grass is always greener" approach in this situation. While it's undeniable that going to a T14 school would be much better than Cardozo/UConn, if this dude takes a year off and does worse, or gets the same score, he risks losing the $ he would have gotten. Giving up a full ride from an OK school could turn out to be disastrous, because you really need to be positive that you can not only do better on the LSAT, but substantially better, so that you at least hit some of the T14's medians (168+). If you score the same, or worse, as before, you will probably not see the same full ride from those schools, and have wasted a year of your life, along with hundreds of thousands in lost $.

Basically, let's be cognizant that 'retake & reapply' also has risks, that could be greater than actually going.

Brassica7 wrote:I am a UConn student lucky enough to have a position with a good firm this summer, and I think you should wait a year and reapply. Between Cardozo and UConn, I think it comes down to where you want to work. If you have to take out loans for living expenses at UConn but would have no debt at all from Cardozo, then this gives a definite edge to Cardozo.

I think that you have a better than 20% chance of getting a decent job from UConn, at least if you define decent as one where you learn to practice a substantive area of law and can afford a middle class lifestyle or better. Around 70% of the class gets this. If you define "decent" as biglaw or midlaw, then yeah, the number of people with those jobs shrinks to around 20%. If you want to work at a big firm in NY, you need to be one of the top students here.

I have not seen any evidence of section stacking at UConn, but I cannot be completely certain it does not occur.

If you get into a better school next year, you would have a much better shot at earning 100k+ right out of the gate. However, you might be paying sticker at Cornell (just an example), so although the risk of getting screwed goes down (more of Cornell's class gets good jobs), the consequences of not getting a legal job go up (no job and huge debt). Overall, I imagine you could get into a better school with a good scholly if you reapplied, especially if you managed to get your LSAT up a bit. You are right that it does not go up for everyone who retakes, but even if your score doesn't improve, your list of acceptances will if you apply early next year.

Iv'e been working a dead end job for a yr already, waiting out another yr just to perhaps get myself into Cornell or Gulc and take on $200,000 in debt just isn't sounding very attractive right now. I have basically made the decision to attend Cardozo next yr, although I haven't committed yet.

Have you considered other law schools that are likely to offer scholarship money based on your current numbers ? The tone of your last post suggests that you are settling for a law school. Where do you want to live & work after law school ?

CanadianWolf wrote:Have you considered other law schools that are likely to offer scholarship money based on your current numbers ? The tone of your last post suggests that you are settling for a law school. Where do you want to live & work after law school ?

I'm From NY, wanna stay In NY or close to NYC. Not at all... I am actually thoroughly excited and cant wait to practice law. I have made the decision to accept the un-stipulated Cardozo scholly. I'm just more comfortable taking the money, and at the same time, confident that I'm still gonna do well!